Actually it's big claim to fame in this area is that it can be injection moulded, like thermoplastics. That means they could ditch the milling entirely. It costs a LOT more money than aluminum, but my guess is for small amounts of material the milling costs might be more than the material.

VERY interesting development.

Maury

It's likely it will show up in the smaller products first then as an alternative to milling tiny iPod cases out of blocks of aluminium perhaps.

Very cool that they have an exclusivity arrangement also although we were told they had the same with lots of products and processes in the past and that hasn't stopped the rest of the industry from shamelessly copying them.

Hopefully cheaper too. All the metal unibody designs have increased the prices of the laptops.

The weight should be able to drop in the Mac Pro too but we'll see.

More expensive most likely. This is real expensive stuff. In very small quantities the cost isn't much, but enough for a laptop case might not be cost effective. IPods, iPhones, and possibly even the tablet might be able to use this. The tablet has only one piece and it might be possible to use this to replace that as there are no heavy, or moving components inside. There are some complaints that it's just a bit too heavy for use as a bookreader, and while I haven't found that to be much of a problem, I admit that losing a few ounces would be helpful for that purpose.

But then, it's always possible that Apple has something entirely new in mind that this would be perfect for, and without which, the product would't be practical. If that's so, and it's certainly possible, then cornering the market for electronic use of this product would possibly give them a major advantage in that new product line that other companies wouldn't be able to match for years, if ever.

More expensive most likely. This is real expensive stuff. In very small quantities the cost isn't much, but enough for a laptop case might not be cost effective. IPods, iPhones, and possibly even the tablet might be able to use this. The tablet has only one piece and it might be possible to use this to replace that as there are no heavy, or moving components inside. There are some complaints that it's just a bit too heavy for use as a bookreader, and while I haven't found that to be much of a problem, I admit that losing a few ounces would be helpful for that purpose.

But then, it's always possible that Apple has something entirely new in mind that this would be perfect for, and without which, the product would't be practical. If that's so, and it's certainly possible, then cornering the market for electronic use of this product would possibly give them a major advantage in that new product line that other companies wouldn't be able to match for years, if ever.

I agree.

Some interesting properties of the material I have found in a few minutes of looking:

- It's "bouncy" and objects made of it will flex or bounce before they break or deform.
- It can be made "transparent like glass" and in some instances is referred to as "metallic glass."

If that's true, it could very well make the next iPhone practically indestructible if used for the front and back plates. If the iPhone/iPod antenna is the metallic band and the back and front were this stuff, you'd get great signal reception combined with much higher resistance to breaking.

It's likely it will show up in the smaller products first then as an alternative to milling tiny iPod cases out of blocks of aluminium perhaps.

Very cool that they have an exclusivity arrangement also although we were told they had the same with lots of products and processes in the past and that hasn't stopped the rest of the industry from shamelessly copying them.

If the agreement is exclusive "in perpetuity", then that's exactly what it means. Liquidmetal has patents and trade secrets filed and granted for this. No one else will be making its like any time soon.

It's different from companies copying the way something looks, though if it looks too much like another product, the company can sue over "dress", something Apple did over a dispute involving the design of the original iMac, which they won.

Mithral is pretty good, but cuendillar is much better. You can make your part out of anything first, and then turn it into cuendillar afterwards, so it's really easy and inexpensive to make things into it. You do need someone with the One Power to make the change though.

Some interesting properties of the material I have found in a few minutes of looking:

- It's "bouncy" and objects made of it will flex or bounce before they break or deform.
- It can be made "transparent like glass" and in some instances is referred to as "metallic glass."

If that's true, it could very well make the next iPhone practically indestructible if used for the front and back plates. If the iPhone/iPod antenna is the metallic band and the back and front were this stuff, you'd get great signal reception combined with much higher resistance to breaking.

It's an interesting thought, but like other metals, it's conductive. I'm not sure what that would mean for a screen surface. Either it would be impossible, it would give some characteristic that can't now be achieved. But as it's one whole piece, I don't see how sensing lines could be used to tell where a touch originates from.

This is a tiny company, with a market cap of less than $25M. I wonder why Apple did not buy it outright for the whole nine yards, and not just a piece of the IP.

Heck, Mark Hurd could have bought it with just a portion of his severance payment.....

They probably don't want to make parts for others, and there are contracts that they would have to honor. It would also mean that they would be in the business of manufacturing the metal themselves, and they may not want to do that. We don't know exactly what this license means.

Hmm?.. Actually as long as you have external antennas, backplates don't need to be radio transparent. See, the iP4 antenna design is a good step in the right direction preparing the way for even more radical design solutions.

The extemal antenna was indeed a radical technology design of the iPhone 4 that many do not fully understand or appreciate. Design wise, there is no reason why the external antena needs to be limited to the metal strip in the iPhone 4 design. However, since the metal is a electrical conductor, Apple has to find ways to minimize "short circuits" which may require thin coatings or boundaries, just like those in silicon wafers or some similar technologies.

The Cost of it relates to whether it can be mass produced. And Apple may be the only one in the world where they can put up price of their products while still getting demand exceeding their supply.
Since Aluminum is getting more expensive day by day, Zr-alloy may be able to outweight its investment in the future.

I think the reason why Apple didn't buy it would be because Apple has no interest in dealing with NASA and may be Department of Defense.

[QUOTE=Maury Markowitz;1693018]Actually it's big claim to fame in this area is that it can be injection moulded, like thermoplastics. That means they could ditch the milling entirely. It costs a LOT more money than aluminum, but my guess is for small amounts of material the milling costs might be more than the material.

VERY interesting development. [QUOTE]

Many metal alloys can be moulded -- just like plastics and glass -- to form all sorts of configurations and forms. Many mass manufactured metal products and parts are manufactured by molding. The "drilling" manufacture, as presented to the layman, of the aluminum unibody for NoteBook Pros might be replaceable with much simpler molding and refinishing manufacture processes.

Quote:

Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post
This is a tiny company, with a market cap of less than $25M. I wonder why Apple did not buy it outright for the whole nine yards, and not just a piece of the IP.

May not always be the most prudent because industrial metal alloy technology can change rapidly to achieve all sorts of functionality or special uses. The said alloys may be supplanted easily by others in the near future that may even be cheaper or have other more interesting properties. Also as noted, the metal alloys in question are used in various industries. It will distract Apple to become the lincense vendor for the technology.

HTC & others are only interesting in offering things they can sell as features, even if they don't work properly for as little cost as possible. They're not interested in making the best product possible.
.

Samsung already has a LiquidMetal Phone. I hope that Apple cancels their product. Only the iPhone should be allowed.

Actually, I do not understand the technological rationale for using glass for the back casing even for smaller devices, like a smartphones. I was surprised therefore when the iPhone 4 used glass for the backcasing. It is mostly aesthetic that is lost in the white iPhone 4. One possible technical rationale for "glass backcasing" would have been using the back as "solar battery" area; but that may be a different "glass" technology altogether. Apple has an approved patent for solar powered technology for mobile devices.

CGC

The rationale is not merely technological. In Apple products, form follows function like a hand in a glove. That is why Jony gave us the glass back.

May not always be the most prudent because industrial metal alloy technology can change rapidly to achieve all sorts of functionality or special uses. The said alloys may be supplanted easily by others in the near future that may even be cheaper or have other more interesting properties. Also as noted, the metal alloys in question are used in various industries. It will distract Apple to become the lincense vendor for the technology.

CGC

Here's an interesting, somewhat related link concerning Gorilla glass. In this case, it was a waiting game:

Ah, I see it now. Ugly looking phone. Based on this article, it looks like Samsung won't be able to use Liquidmetal anymore now that Apple has an exclusive license. I bet Apple paid big bucks to get that exclusivity.

The Cost of it relates to whether it can be mass produced. And Apple may be the only one in the world where they can put up price of their products while still getting demand exceeding their supply.
Since Aluminum is getting more expensive day by day, Zr-alloy may be able to outweight its investment in the future.

I think the reason why Apple didn't buy it would be because Apple has no interest in dealing with NASA and may be Department of Defense.

This will always be more expensive. Aluminum costs what it does because large amounts of electricity needs to be used to refine that metal. But aluminum is the most abundent metal found, so that's not a problem. But this alloy costs more for several reasons, one of which is that the metals involved aren't that plentiful, and will always cost more.

Samsung already has a LiquidMetal Phone. I hope that Apple cancels their product. Only the iPhone should be allowed.

Apple can't cancel any contracts Liquidmetal has with others, as they don't own the company. I would imagine that as that phone goes out of production, no more of those products by anyone other that Apple will be allowed.

I see the Terminator references are already out there, but what about Apple’s move into more and more areas of development, which includes these exclusive contracts. It reminds me a bit of Umbrella Corp from Resident Evil. Apple is setting themselves up for a future that no other CE company can compete with. Sometimes I wonder if it’s too much.

The rationale is not merely technological. In Apple products, form follows function like a hand in a glove. That is why Jony gave us the glass back.

I understand the aesthetic effect of the glass casing in the black iPhone 4 -- both front and back have "glassy black" aesthetic form. The aforementioned aesthetic form is not as apparent with the white iPhone 4.

The technological use of glass, as casing in the front is obvious -- trasparency is required to view the contents, as well as the touch technology. Can you cite any techological rationale to have a glass backcasing for the iPhone 4?

In fact, because it is glass. even a gorilla glass, it is more likely to shutter or break -- front and back -- compared to metal alloys. Thus, it is more imperative to have another outer case for the iPhone 4 because there are more areas that could break or shutter. However, having another outer casing to protect the glass -- both front and back -- would conceal the aesthetic form most of the time.

No. The T-1000 and T-X both used mimetic poly-alloy. The T-X used this for its outside coating since it had an internal structure.

Here's what really happened: Skynet sent Marilyn Mansonwait, make that Shirley Mansonback in time to oversee the, ahem, hostile takeover of LiquidMetal Technologies because of their extensive R&D experience in superdurable metal alloys. Once the takeover was finalized, she, um, "terminated" the entire LiquidMetal staff and established herself as CEO. Then, she thought, "Hmmm. LiquidMetal is a cool name and an even cooler idea!" So, mimetic poly-alloy (thanks ghostface!) was developed. And the rest, as they say, is history!

BTW. "unobtanium"WORST FAKE SUBSTANCE NAME EVER!!
What I'm really hoping is that some smart-ass researcher will develop a NEW alloy or molecular something-or-other, and actually CALL it "unobtanium"! THAT would be awesome!

Actually it's big claim to fame in this area is that it can be injection moulded, like thermoplastics. That means they could ditch the milling entirely. It costs a LOT more money than aluminum, but my guess is for small amounts of material the milling costs might be more than the material.

VERY interesting development.

Maury

Maybe they will literally encase the electronics in this alloy. No seams or openings at all. Let's see how iFixIt handles that?

I am not sure exactly what you mean by the response. Indeed, glass, and gorilla glass in particular have past, present and future uses that were not anticipated due to other technical and market developments -- one example is fiber optics.

Corning has a better reason to research and explore the multiple and potential uses of glass because it is the focus of the company.

Apple, as it has wisely done, simply licenses these technologies but do not always have to buy the companies that invented the technologies. This provides more flexibility to move on or revert to other technologies, depending on the needs of their products.

I see the Terminator references are already out there, but what about Apples move into more and more areas of development, which includes these exclusive contracts. It reminds me a bit of Umbrella Corp from Resident Evil. Apple is setting themselves up for a future that no other CE company can compete with. Sometimes I wonder if its too much.

No company can last forever. We're still in the early stages of technological civilization as defined by the use of electricity as a power source. Apple is rising, and will likely do so for some time, as long as they continue to have advantages. But at some point, as things get advanced enough, it's possible that no one company will have any major advantage over another, and this will disappear.

In regards to the rear glass on the iP4, does anyone else think a rear touch screen would be useful for navigation purposes (e.g., scrolling web pages or game control)? My fat fingers frequently inadvertently click links or ad banners while surfing on my iPhone.
-----------

Actually, I do not understand the technological rationale for using glass for the back casing even for smaller devices, like a smartphones. I was surprised therefore when the iPhone 4 used glass for the backcasing. It is mostly aesthetic that is lost in the white iPhone 4. One possible technical rationale for "glass backcasing" would have been using the back as "solar battery" area; but that may be a different "glass" technology altogether. Apple has an approved patent for solar powered technology for mobile devices.

This is a tiny company, with a market cap of less than $25M. I wonder why Apple did not buy it outright for the whole nine yards, and not just a piece of the IP.

Heck, Mark Hurd could have bought it with just a portion of his severance payment.....

The article says this company even makes medical products. I don't think Apple would want to get wrapped up in that, and shutting that section of the company down would just be a horrible idea... among the problems with the other contracts, like some have already stated.